Skip to main content

About your Search

Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10 (some duplicates have been removed)
. the impasse is just one of the many strains on relations between russia and the united states. iran is another is the dis trust over nato's defense shield. earlier this month the u.s. agency of the international development to lead russia. i'm pleased to have sergey lavrov back at this table, welcome. >> thank you very much, nice to be back. >> rose: u.s.-russia relations. >> yes, i believe we agree that these relations should be promoted. when president obama came to the whitehouse, he and his team assessed the relationship between moscow and washington and suggested what they call the reset of those relations which we supported. and i believe that since then, we have been having understanding between us, between moscow and russia, that the really mutually beneficial partnership in the interest of the russian and american people in the interest of international relations given the importance of the two countries can be based on equal, mutually respectful, mually beneficial relatiohip. and on that route, we achieved quite a lot. i would be incomplete if i don't mention that there are problems
the young woman who grew up in the united states, and whose life has evolved to encompass other cultures, other societies, and unimaginable responsibilities and love that as a young giri wouldn't even have dreamt of. >> hinojosa: so you brought it up, love. there is something about your story which i think... people see the power of this love, and when they see pictures of you with your husband, king hussein, this connection that you had... and i think that... i remember thinking when i was a kid, trying to kind of do the double culture thing, because i was mexican, but i was also american, and just seeing you, and i was like, "wow, she was able to this. she was able to brid the two cultures." but so much of it was based on the power of love. >> a great deal, and while many people don't realize my arab heritage, and that i had worked in the arab world, i had worked in iran, and i'd worked in australia before i married, but i at the time was working in the arab world from a base in jordan and traveling throughout, doing research throughout a great many arab countries. so i had something
to the current prime minister of israel. the united states must keep israel out as our most important ally in the middle east to save time doing what is right for the united states'. >> the polls show that people did not like the way he responded, the way he jumped into the middle of that catastrophe to score cheap political point. he is gaining nothing on the foreign policy side. >> charles speaks of a superpower in retreat. this is about barack obama right now, this question. >> i have listened to a lot of foreign policy experts from previous administration's talk about this. everybody seemed to agree that we are in for a very rough ride here and there are very limited things that we can do about it. you do not want to have people in our embassies die. >> on that question, is the barack obama administration covering something up? was it a planned attack? >> it was a terrorist attack them been giving it a label hardly matters. it is an attack that we should of known about. we should protect every consulate and every embassy that we are in. we have a 16,000-person and the sea consulate's s
's got the uwe united states out of iraq. the united states after going up has now come down to some extent in afghanistan. he mdleast,ven though it's turbulent, is more open than it was. so i think the president in general can point to some areas where he moved forward and some areas obviously his critics will say where he movedded back. all in all it's a defense i believe and defendable record. >> ifill: i want to walk through some of that piece by piece. referencing the president's speech today, he turned over a big chunk of it to talking about the difference between railing against or speaking out against violence... violent extremism versus protecting free speech. why was so much devoted to that topic? >> gwen, i thought it was an interesting speech. very reflective speech. i think probably designd by the president and his advisors to try to heal some of the wounds that have been so apparent between the muslim world and the united states over these last two weeks, these very tragic weeks. i thought it was interesting the way he framed the issue. he clearly disassociated the unit
, including japan, the united states and singapore. there are large oil deposits. most of the crude exported from the terminal originates in this area. during the soviet era, the oil fields of western siberia were the center of russia's oil production. however, after nearly 40 years of productivity, they will soon be depleted. to take their place, production has been stepped up in eastern siberia. one of the oil fields now being developed by russian oil company s is the size of switzerland. it was first discovered during the soviet era. at that time, there was no way to transport the oil, so it was left untouched for nearly 50 years. >> translator: currently, we have five tanks with a capacity of 3,000 cubic meters. one for processing and four for storage. and construction recently began for two tanks of 10,000 cubic meters. >> reporter: for decades, the population of the local village has been falling. there were no jobs. the oil field development prompted the population boom. it's also brought new infrastructure to the village. >> translator: the number of children has increased, and there
further monetary policy to boost the united states economy. after last friday's disappointing labor report there is a growing call for a robust response from the central bank which is the fed, financial markets have rallied with the expectation of a third round of bond buying known as cuan tative easing. but that option is controversial with the election two months away. joining me from washington david leonhardt, washington bureau chief of the "new york times". in 2011 he won a pulitzer prize rhis columns on the u.s. economy. i'm pleased to have him back on this program. >> thank you, charlie. >> rose: so what might the fed do and what consequences might happen? >> well, the fed is now talking about doing a version of something it has already done a couple timesment people may have heard the phrase q e3 to refer to what this is n technical terms that is quantitative easing 3. let's skip the technical terms, in essence it would buy up assets. in the course of buying up assets it would try to reduce long-term interest rate short trem interest rates are already essentily at zero, the fed mov
balance of power. >> rose: nobody wants the united states to do that. >> no, i know that! that's why there's a it will bit of disingenuousness of people saying "what must we do?" a no-fly zone. okay, what happens when the syrians shoot at the no-fly zone. what happens when the russians get involved in it's a problem from hell. it'ser the to believe see what's going on. >> is there any answer in terms of somehow a group of countries getting together, neighbors and others, including iran even though that would be very difficult for everybody to come to some kind so soutns because they have the russians, iranians, americans. >> people would have... >>. >> rose: and arabs. >> and iraq. to the extent that it worked it worked because there was one power there. can you imagine a committee of the iranians, the russians, the chinese. and that's my dilemma with it. i don't know how it's going to end. i think this could burn on in different forms for a long time. charlie, step back, what are we seeing? we're seeing two huge political orders crumbling at once. one is called the european union where th
a lot of the same problems that we have here in the united states. >> ifill: is there also a problem with coming to some sort of resolution as far as germany and other bank-- money-- money givers go? that somebody else is going to get in line. that if you give greece money, spain is going to be standing there. if you give spain money portugal could be standing there. >> there is this problem of political moral hazard going on which is really, as you say, well, if you give us, let's say, debt relief to greece, well, then you can be pretty sure that other european countries that also have received bailouts will want the same treatment. so what you're trying to do in europe, in minute, is really to-- i believe that ultimately debt relief will have-- further debt relief will have to be given to greece by the euro area governments. but they're really trying to make the road to that so arduous and so terrible that nobody else in europe will really want to go down that ute. an as we'r looking at greece today-- which has a cumulative decline in g.d.p. of, you know, close to 20% and still dro
, when should united nations or member states intervene? >> well, these are different situations. in libya, i think we've been right in intervening because gaddafi was a dictator, and you remember that there was a sort of libyan spring, and nobody was possible because of gaddafi. therefore, a decision was taken to intervene. >> rose: is the principle you don't intervene no matter how atroacials the acts of the government in power, if in fact they have a member of the security council who opposes? or if in fact they have an army which will make it a very bloody affair. >> no. >> rose: are those the rules? >> no. the rule is because of veto if one or two people-- nations -- permanent security members-- we cannot contribute because our principle is to intervene only if we have a legal authorization. and up to now, three times, russia and china say no. and, therefore, up to now, we haven't been able to intervene. which is a humanitarian catastrophe. because every day you have more than 200 people killed. and because the security council doesn't say yes, we can't do anything. no, it's
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10 (some duplicates have been removed)